ORCID Profile
0000-0003-1863-6739
Current Organisations
Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris
,
Université de Paris
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Related Links
Publications
Methods to Generate Innovative Research Ideas and Improve Patient and Public Involvement in Modern Epidemiological Research: Review, Patient Viewpoint, and Guidelines for Implementation of a Digital Cohort Study (Preprint)
Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc.
Date: 13-11-2020
Abstract: atient and public involvement (PPI) in research aims to increase the quality and relevance of research by incorporating the perspective of those ultimately affected by the research. Despite these potential benefits, PPI is rarely included in epidemiology protocols. he aim of this study is to provide an overview of methods used for PPI and offer practical recommendations for its efficient implementation in epidemiological research. e conducted a review on PPI methods. We mirrored it with a patient advocate’s viewpoint about PPI. We then identified key steps to optimize PPI in epidemiological research based on our review and the viewpoint of the patient advocate, taking into account the identification of barriers to, and facilitators of, PPI. From these, we provided practical recommendations to launch a patient-centered cohort study. We used the implementation of a new digital cohort study as an exemplary use case. e analyzed data from 97 studies, of which 58 (60%) were performed in the United Kingdom. The most common methods were workshops (47/97, 48%) surveys (33/97, 34%) meetings, events, or conferences (28/97, 29%) focus groups (25/97, 26%) interviews (23/97, 24%) consensus techniques (8/97, 8%) James Lind Alliance consensus technique (7/97, 7%) social media analysis (6/97, 6%) and experience-based co-design (3/97, 3%). The viewpoint of a patient advocate showed a strong interest in participating in research. The most usual PPI modalities were research ideas (60/97, 62%), co-design (42/97, 43%), defining priorities (31/97, 32%), and participation in data analysis (25/97, 26%). We identified 9 general recommendations and 32 key PPI-related steps that can serve as guidelines to increase the relevance of epidemiological studies. PI is a project within a project that contributes to improving knowledge and increasing the relevance of research. PPI methods are mainly used for idea generation. On the basis of our review and case study, we recommend that PPI be included at an early stage and throughout the research cycle and that methods be combined for generation of new ideas. For e-cohorts, the use of digital tools is essential to scale up PPI. We encourage investigators to rely on our practical recommendations to extend PPI in future epidemiological studies.
Methods to Generate Innovative Research Ideas and Improve Patient and Public Involvement in Modern Epidemiological Research: Review, Patient Viewpoint, and Guidelines for Implementation of a Digital Cohort Study
Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc.
Date: 23-12-2021
DOI: 10.2196/25743
Abstract: Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research aims to increase the quality and relevance of research by incorporating the perspective of those ultimately affected by the research. Despite these potential benefits, PPI is rarely included in epidemiology protocols. The aim of this study is to provide an overview of methods used for PPI and offer practical recommendations for its efficient implementation in epidemiological research. We conducted a review on PPI methods. We mirrored it with a patient advocate’s viewpoint about PPI. We then identified key steps to optimize PPI in epidemiological research based on our review and the viewpoint of the patient advocate, taking into account the identification of barriers to, and facilitators of, PPI. From these, we provided practical recommendations to launch a patient-centered cohort study. We used the implementation of a new digital cohort study as an exemplary use case. We analyzed data from 97 studies, of which 58 (60%) were performed in the United Kingdom. The most common methods were workshops (47/97, 48%) surveys (33/97, 34%) meetings, events, or conferences (28/97, 29%) focus groups (25/97, 26%) interviews (23/97, 24%) consensus techniques (8/97, 8%) James Lind Alliance consensus technique (7/97, 7%) social media analysis (6/97, 6%) and experience-based co-design (3/97, 3%). The viewpoint of a patient advocate showed a strong interest in participating in research. The most usual PPI modalities were research ideas (60/97, 62%), co-design (42/97, 43%), defining priorities (31/97, 32%), and participation in data analysis (25/97, 26%). We identified 9 general recommendations and 32 key PPI-related steps that can serve as guidelines to increase the relevance of epidemiological studies. PPI is a project within a project that contributes to improving knowledge and increasing the relevance of research. PPI methods are mainly used for idea generation. On the basis of our review and case study, we recommend that PPI be included at an early stage and throughout the research cycle and that methods be combined for generation of new ideas. For e-cohorts, the use of digital tools is essential to scale up PPI. We encourage investigators to rely on our practical recommendations to extend PPI in future epidemiological studies.
Corticosteroids in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia who require oxygen: observational comparative study using routine care data
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 04-2021
Corticosteroids are associated with increased survival in elderly presenting severe SARS-Cov2 infection
Publisher: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Date: 13-11-2020
DOI: 10.1101/2020.11.10.20226886
Abstract: To assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids among elderly patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring oxygen. Comparative observational study based on routine care data. Baseline characteristics of patients were balanced using propensity-score inverse probability of treatment weighting. Geriatric and infectious diseases wards from 36 hospitals in France and Luxembourg. Adults 80 years old PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection or typical CT-scan images, requiring oxygen ≥ 3L/min and with an inflammatory syndrome (C-reactive protein ≥ 40mg/L). The primary outcome was overall survival at day 14. The secondary outcome was the proportion of patients discharged from hospital to home/rehabilitation on day 14. Adverse events were abstracted from electronic health records. Among the 267 patients included in the analysis, 96 were assigned to the treatment group. Median age was 86, interquartile range 83 to 90 and 95% had a SARS-CoV-2 PCR-confirmed diagnosis. Use of corticosteroids was significantly associated with an increased survival (weighted hazard ratio [wHR] 0.66, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.97). There was no significant difference between the treatment and control groups regarding the proportion of patients discharged to home/rehabilitation at day 14 (wRR 1.11, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.81). Twenty-two (16.7%) patients receiving corticosteroids developed adverse events while only 11 (6.4%) from the control group did. Corticosteroids were associated with a significant increase the day-14 overall survival of patients over 80 years old hospitalized for severe COVID-19. We certify that this work is novel. As of today, studies on the efficacy of corticosteroids did not specifically target elderly patients. Among older patients aged over 80 years old, the RECOVERY trial found no difference in the survival of patients treated or not with dexamethasone. However, the heterogeneity in the severity of infection within the latter subgroup limited the drawing of strong conclusions
Related Organisations
Université Paris Diderot UFR De Médecine Site Xavier-Bichat
Location: France
Related Funding Activities
No related grants have been discovered for Viet-Thi Tran.